It is fairly typical to hear scientific materialists speak disparagingly about astrology.\u00a0 In fact, almost every scientist would dismiss astrology as ridiculous.\u00a0 On a macroscopic basis, how could faraway star formations effect me<\/p>\n
I believe the scientists are mistaken. If perihelion is a crucial element in disease, as science has proved, then aren’t the stars just a pattern for keeping time. In\u00a0fact,\u00a0zodiacal\u00a0constellations\u00a0are\u00a0indicators\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0planet’s\u00a0perihelion\u00a0cycle,\u00a0or\u00a0how\u00a0far\u00a0and\u00a0quickly\u00a0it\u00a0is\u00a0moving.
\nA\u00a0link\u00a0between\u00a0the\u00a0perihelion\u00a0cycle\u00a0and\u00a0human\u00a0embryonic\u00a0formation\u00a0becomes\u00a0evident.
\nThe\u00a0scope\u00a0of\u00a0that\u00a0influence\u00a0has\u00a0yet\u00a0to\u00a0be\u00a0determined.
\nA\u00a0thought\u00a0experiment\u00a0entails\u00a0cross-correlating\u00a0all\u00a0current\u00a0disease\u00a0data.
\nTo this extent, dismissing the paradigm of astrology outright is normal. Whatever effects must be imperceptible. \u00a0However people still find it useful as an organizing principle. \u00a0The calendrical nature of western astrology could be based in perihelion based observations as well. \u00a0The Maya based their calendar on the orbits and phases of the planet Venus with such accuracy that it wasn’t more exactly measured until the 20th century. \u00a0Other cultures have based their time keeping on other organizing principles. They all agree that it is the organizing principal itself responsible, I.e. the darkness of winter or the brightness of stars, or the ebbs and flows of internal energy. The distortions of reality which are tied to various season. \u00a0These have been attributed to orbits of planets, and conjunctions of stars, or premonitions.<\/p>\n
You can imagine how a learned person in Kepler’s time could conceive of such a thing Newton was one such person. \u00a0Newton’s from of Alchemy was based on spiritual as chemical principles.<\/p>\n
What they could not do, and which you can, is imagine how the speed and closeness of the sun varies over time. \u00a0How that rise and fall of energy is measurable. How that<\/p>\n
Now imagine the sun growing and fading in intensity over the year. \u00a0Now put a dot on January 4th. That is the cross point of the analemma. The day you can start to imagine the the earth is nearest the sun. Everywhere on the planet.<\/p>\n
Interpretation of facts may lead to new conclusions. First you must examine the basis your own interpretations.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
It is fairly typical to hear scientific materialists speak disparagingly about astrology.\u00a0 In fact, almost every scientist would dismiss astrology as ridiculous.\u00a0 On a macroscopic basis, how could faraway star formations effect me I believe the scientists are mistaken. If perihelion is a crucial element in disease, as science has proved, then aren’t the stars …<\/p>\n